‘Knowing’ telegraphs most of its moves

When I saw the lobby and print ads for “Knowing,” I was expecting something a bit more, shall we say, apocalyptic. The poster alone, with the Earth hanging in space, the bottom half aglow with fire; I thought it was a Roland Emmerich (“Independence Day,” “The Day After Tomorrow”) production. He’s got his own disaster porn movie coming out later this year, but that’s a different review.

The trailer for “Knowing” seemed to reinforce that impression. Lots of disaster sequences; ominous title cards asking what we (the viewer) would do to protect our loved ones if we knew the future was going to be horrific. When I finally got the chance to see the film, there was plenty of disaster, but it wasn’t the focus of the film like I had expected.

Warning: to discuss the film properly, I have to include some spoilers. If you don’t want to know, read no further. Go rent the film first, watch it, then come back and read the rest.

The film opens in 1959, where a new elementary school has just opened. The teacher announces that one of the students’ ideas, a time capsule, has been picked as the best way to dedicate the new school. Each of the students is tasked to draw a picture of what they think the future will be like in 50 years, when the time capsule is opened. One student, Lucinda Embry (Lara Robinson), writes a sheet full of numbers instead. She claims that she was told the numbers by the people whispering in her head.

Fifty years later, John Koestler (Nicholas Cage), an M.I.T. astrophysics professor and recent widower, is raising his ten-year-old son Caleb (Chandler Canterbury) alone. The time capsule is opened, and Caleb gets Lucinda’s sheet of numbers. John examines it more closely, and sees that it is a listing of the dates, geographic locations and casualty numbers of scores of disasters and other horrific events, such as 9/11.

Being a scientist, John’s discovery of the pattern is tempered by cynicism. But when the first of the last three disaster sequences, a plane crash, happens literally in front of him, he begins to believe. Caleb begins to hear whispers, and starts seeing strangers in long coats.

John seeks out Lucinda’s daughter, Diana (Rose Byrne) and her daughter (Robinson again) and tells her the story, but Diana rebuffs him. When the next disaster comes true, Diana finds John and together they go where her mother last lived, looking for clues to the final disaster. What they find has profound implications not only for them, but for the entire planet as well.

The extras are rather limited; a commentary by director Alex Proyas; the featurettes “Knowing All: The Making of a Futuristic Thriller,” and “Visions of the Apocalypse.”

Proyas is talking to someone (not introduced) in the commentary, who leads him on with questions. Early on, he makes the interesting comment that many apocalyptic films often have the Earth saved at the last minute; this one wants to explore what humanity does when that isn’t possible.

The making-of featurette is pretty good, especially when they’re discussing the two-minute long unbroken shot of the airplane disaster. I didn’t realize that shot was unbroken until they discussed it. Strangely enough, Cage is not interviewed in this featurette, which is strange, as he’s always been very good about publicity for his films.

“Visions” has a few clips from the film, but is mostly interviews with leading psychologists, scholars, scientists and other Important People about the various ways the Earth will come to its destruction. The general consensus is that the Earth will live until the Sun dies, just over 5 billion years from now. It’s reasonable to assume that we have some time, unless we do something to wipe ourselves out first.

The critics were not kind to this film, most castigating it for being too reminiscent of M. Night Shyamalan’s recent film failures. In fact, I found the alien subplot reminding me of Shyamalan’s “Signs,” even though they turned out to be benevolent. I do wonder about the idea of leaving two kids alone on an alien planet, though.

Roger Ebert was one of the few critics that rather enjoyed the film, because it made him think about the competing theories of determinism vs. randomness. He gave the film four stars in his printed review, and then expanded upon it (with spoilers) in his blog. Ebert does not give four stars lightly, either. Anyone who reads him knows that the four stars review is an indicator that this movie is not to be missed.

I was unable to see it in the theater, but I was excited about the prospect of watching it when it came out on disc. Now that I’ve seen it, I’m somewhere in the middle. I did like how it stirs the pot without making the viewer decide on determinism vs. randomness, but I found it rather plodding in parts for a film labeled as a thriller.

I also thought the final apocalyptic scenes of the Earth’s destruction were, while superbly and spectacularly done, unnecessary. I think I would have liked it better if the Cage character had simply met with his father, mother and sister and then the scene faded to white, symbolizing the destruction, and then ended there. The destruction would have been left to our own imagination (or nightmares). If that seems to be at odds with what I said at the beginning of this review, so be it. I’m in thinking mode. Besides, with the world about to end, I doubt that John would have been able to calmly drive his truck through city streets choked with people frantic about the impending apocalypse.

If I were to give the film my own rating, I’d say it was between 2½ and 3 stars. It plods in parts, it telegraphs moves. I knew that the whispering people were aliens coming to save some of the population before the film shifted to present day, and that the Cage character would have to make a Great Sacrifice before the film ended. But it does make you want to pause the film every once in a while and think about the concepts it’s trying to put across.

Bottom line: Rent first. If you like it, go ahead and buy it. You pick what format.